| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
April 23rd 07, 04:41 AM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
Lies and Distortion in Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth
http://newyork.craigslist.org/wch/pol/314920789.html http://www.cei.org/pdf/ait/app.pdf Al Gore...... quite an interesting guy! Made an interesting little socialist propoganda film called "An Inconvenient Truth" as most of us know. He's been up here in Toronto, Canada a few times giving talks to the "True Believers" of this new Global Warming, Climate Change, "It's All Our Fault" religion. Signed a lot of autographs for left wing Canadians that admire him. I guess he is one of the High Priests, just like that Dr. David Suzuki guy. He is a real Prophet of Doom in this new faith too. The web site URL's above show Lies & Distortions in his film. Quite interesting. Cato |
|
#2
April 23rd 07, 03:09 PM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lies and Distortion in Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth
On 22 Apr 2007 19:41:47 -0700, Cato wrote:
http://newyork.craigslist.org/wch/pol/314920789.html http://www.cei.org/pdf/ait/app.pdf Al Gore...... quite an interesting guy! Made an interesting little socialist propoganda film called "An Inconvenient Truth" as most of us know. He's been up here in Toronto, Canada a few times giving talks to the "True Believers" of this new Global Warming, Climate Change, "It's All Our Fault" religion. Signed a lot of autographs for left wing Canadians that admire him. I guess he is one of the High Priests, just like that Dr. David Suzuki guy. He is a real Prophet of Doom in this new faith too. The web site URL's above show Lies & Distortions in his film. Quite interesting. Cato http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Iain_Murray |
|
#4
April 23rd 07, 08:10 PM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
|
Global Warming is Corporation's Biggest Government Trough Yet
"David" wrote in message
... On 22 Apr 2007 19:41:47 -0700, Cato wrote: http://newyork.craigslist.org/wch/pol/314920789.html http://www.cei.org/pdf/ait/app.pdf Al Gore...... quite an interesting guy! Made an interesting little socialist propoganda film called "An Inconvenient Truth" as most of us know. He's been up here in Toronto, Canada a few times giving talks to the "True Believers" of this new Global Warming, Climate Change, "It's All Our Fault" religion. Signed a lot of autographs for left wing Canadians that admire him. I guess he is one of the High Priests, just like that Dr. David Suzuki guy. He is a real Prophet of Doom in this new faith too. The web site URL's above show Lies & Distortions in his film. Quite interesting. Cato http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Iain_Murray -------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Dominant media" editors and others frequently accuse climate disaster skeptics of working for organizations that received funding from corporations. The accusation is intended to squelch debate on the merits - by implying that any such writer or organization should not be trusted, as they have a financial stake in the issue - which believers in climate catastrophe scenarios supposedly do not have. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Global Warming is Corporation's Biggest Government Trough Yet Washington this week officially welcomed the newest industry on the hunt for financial and regulatory favors. Big CarbonCap may have the same dollar-sign agenda as Big Oil or Big Pharma, but don't expect Nancy Pelosi to admit to it. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/i...asp?indid=1248 Democrats want to flog the global warming theme through 2008 and they'll take what help they can get, even if it means cozying up to executives whose goal is to enrich their firms. Right now, the corporate giants calling for a mandatory carbon cap serve too useful a political purpose for anyone to delve into their baser motives. The Climate Action Partnership, a group of 10 major companies that made headlines this week with its call for a national limit on carbon dioxide emissions, would surely feign shock at such an accusation. After all, their plea was carefully timed to coincide with President Bush's State of the Union capitulation on global warming, and it had the desired PR effect. The media dutifully declared that "even" business now recognized the climate threat. Sen. Barbara Boxer, http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/i...asp?indid=2084 lauded the corporate angels for thinking of the "common good." There was a time when the financial press understood that companies exist to make money. And it happens that the cap-and-trade climate program these 10 jolly green giants are now calling for is a regulatory device designed to financially reward companies that reduce CO2 emissions, and punish those that don't. Four of the affiliates--Duke, PG&E, FPL and PNM Resources--are utilities that have made big bets on wind, hydroelectric and nuclear power. So a Kyoto program would reward them for simply enacting their business plan, and simultaneously sock it to their competitors. Duke also owns Cinergy, which relies heavily on dirty, CO2-emitting coal plants. But Cinergy will soon have to replace those plants with cleaner equipment. Under a Kyoto, it'll get paid for its trouble. DuPont has been plunging into biofuels, the use of which would soar under a cap. Somebody has to cobble together all these complex trading deals, so say hello to Lehman Brothers. Caterpillar has invested heavily in new engines that generate "clean energy." British Petroleum is mostly doing public penance for its dirty oil habit, but also gets a plug for its own biofuels venture. Finally, there's General Electric, whose CEO Jeffrey Immelt these days spends as much time in Washington as Connecticut. GE makes all the solar equipment and wind turbines (at $2 million a pop) that utilities would have to buy under a climate regime. GE's revenue from environmental products long ago passed the $10 billion mark, and it doesn't take much "ecomagination" to see why Mr. Immelt is leading the pack of climate profiteers. CEOs are quick learners, and even those who would get smacked by a carbon cap are now devising ways to make warming work to their political advantage. The "most creative" prize goes to steel giant Nucor. Steven Rowlan, the company's environmental director, doesn't want carbon caps in the U.S.--oh, no. The smarter answer, he explains, would be for the U.S. to impose trade restrictions on foreign firms that aren't environmentally clean. Global warming as foil for trade protectionism: Chuck Schumer's dream. What makes this lobby worse than the usual K-Street crowd is that it offers no upside. At least when Big Pharma self-interestedly asks for fewer regulations, the economy benefits. There's nothing capitalist about lobbying for a program that foists its debilitating costs on taxpayers and consumers while redistributing the wealth to a few corporate players. This is what comes from Washington steadily backstepping energy policy into the interventionist 1970s, picking winners and losers. In ethanol, in biodiesel, in wind farms, success isn't a function of supply or demand. The champs are the ones that coax out of Washington the best subsidies and regulations. Global warming is simply the biggest trough yet. Both Republicans and Democrats understand this debate is increasingly about home-state economics, even as they publicly joust about environmental rights or wrongs. The softening Republican stance on a mandatory program is one result. New Mexico's Pete Domenici appeared to undergo an epiphany about global warming in 2005, voting for a Senate resolution supporting caps. The switch might have more to do with remembering that his state is nuclear-power central, and will win big under a new program. Just ask his fellow New Mexican, Jeff Bingaman, who introduced the resolution. Economic interests also motivate those Democrats who won't play nice. The senators who have voted against previous bills represent those industries that will suffer most under Mr. Immelt's agenda. Louisiana's Mary Landrieu (oil); Montana's Max Baucus (coal); West Virginia's Robert Byrd (ditto). House Energy & Commerce Chair John Dingell remains a skeptic, since the last thing his Michigan auto makers need is yet another reason for people to not buy their cars. Which is fine with Ms. Pelosi. The Democratic leadership ran out of the winner's circle last November promising to tackle climate. And much was made this week of Madam Speaker's decision to wrest control of the debate away from Mr. Dingell's purview, handing it instead to a new "select" committee on climate change. But read the fine print. The new vaunted committee will have no legislative authority, but exists solely to hold hearings and to "communicate with the American people." Ms. Pelosi and Harry Reid want to talk about this issue . .. . and talk, and talk and talk. But not necessarily anything more. That's because Democrats want global warming as an issue through 2008. With Al Gore http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/i...asp?indid=2140 getting his Oscar nod, they've got a "problem" that captures the public imagination, as well as an endless supply of cash from thrilled environmental groups. No need to spoil it with a solution. And a Democratic president in 2009 would be more open to any ultimate legislation. Best yet, they've got the "support" of the business community, or at least the savvier elements of it. Welcome, Big CarbonCap; we're likely to be hearing a lot from you. Global warming alarmism generates political and financial incentives The ink has barely dried on its new code of conduct, and already Congress is redefining ethics and pork to fit a global warming agenda. As Will Rogers observed, "with Congress, every time they make a joke, it's a law. And every time they make a law, it's a joke." However, life-altering, economy-wrecking climate bills are no laughing matter. That's why we need to recognize that the Kyoto Protocol and proposed "climate protection" laws will not stabilize the climate, even if CO2 is to blame. It's why we must acknowledge that money to be made, and power to be gained, from climate alarmism and symbolism is a major reason so many are getting on the climate "consensus" bandwagon. In accusing ExxonMobil of giving "more than $19 million since the late 1990s" to public policy institutes that promote climate holocaust "denial," Senate Inquisitors Olympia Snowe and Jay Rockefeller slandered both the donor and recipients. Moreover, this is less than half of what Pew Charitable Trusts and allied foundations contributed to the Pew Center on Climate Change alone over the same period. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/f...asp?fndid=5213 It's a pittance compared to what US environmental groups spent propagating climate chaos scare stories. It amounts to 30 cents for every $1,000 that the US, EU and UN spent since 1993 (some $80 billion all together) on global warming catastrophe research. And it ignores the fact that the Exxon grants also supported malaria control, Third World economic development and many other efforts. Aside from honest, if unfounded, fears of climate disasters, why might others support climate alarmism? Scientists who use climate change to explain environmental changes improve their chances of getting research grants from foundations, corporations - and US government programs that budget a whopping $6.5 billion for global warming in 2007. They also increase the likelihood of getting headlines and quotes in news stories: "Climate change threatens extinction of rare frogs, scientist says." Climate disaster skeptics face an uphill battle on grants, headlines and quotes. Politicians get to grandstand green credentials, cement relationships with activists who can support reelection campaigns and higher aspirations, magically transform $14-billion in alternative energy pork into ethical planetary protection, and promote policies that otherwise would raise serious eyebrows. Corporate actions that cause even one death are dealt with severely; but praise is heaped on federal mileage standards that cause hundreds of deaths, as cars are downsized and plasticized to save fuel and reduce emissions. High energy prices are denounced at congressional hearings, if due to market forces - but praised if imposed by government "to prevent climate change." Drilling in the Arctic or off our coasts is condemned, even to create jobs, tax revenues and enhanced security; but subsidizing wind power to generate 2% of our electricity is lauded, even if giant turbines despoil millions of acres and kill millions of birds. Alarmist rhetoric has also redefined corporate social responsibility, created the Climate Action Partnership and launched the emerging Enviro-Industrial Complex. Environmental activists have turned climate fears into successful fund-raising tools - and a brilliant strategy for achieving their dream of controlling global resource use, technological change and economic development, through laws, treaties, regulations and pressure campaigns. Recent developments promise to supercharge these efforts. Environmental Defense http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=6940 is collaborating with Morgan Stanley, to promote emission trading systems and other climate change initiatives - giving ED direct monetary and policy stakes in the banking, investment and political arenas, and in any carbon allowance or cap-and-trade programs Congress might enact. Other environmental groups, companies and Wall Street firms will no doubt follow their lead. ED designed and led the disingenuous campaign that persuaded many healthcare agencies to ban DDT, resulting in millions of deaths from malaria. Greenpeace, http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=7222 Sierra Club, http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=6930 Union of Concerned Scientists, http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=6631 ED and other groups still post deceitful claims about DDT on their websites, further delaying progress against this killer disease. By blaming climate change for malaria, they deflect criticism for their vile actions. Climate catastrophe claims enable activists to gain official advisory status with companies and governments on environmental issues. They also make it "ethical" for Rainforest Action Network http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=6904 and other pressure groups to oppose power generation in Third World countries, where few have access to electricity - and thereby keep communities perpetually impoverished. Meanwhile, Prince Charles gets lionized for appropriating 62 first class jetliner seats for his entourage of 20, on a trans-Atlantic trip to receive an environmental prize and lecture Americans on saving the Earth - because at least he didn't use his private jet. Companies in the CAP and EIC can develop and promote new product lines, using tax breaks, subsidies, legal mandates and regulatory provisions to gain competitive advantages. They get favorable coverage from the media, and kid-glove treatment from members of Congress who routinely pillory climate chaos skeptics. Some worry that this could become a license to further redefine corporate ethics, present self-interest as planet-saving altruism, and profit from questionable arrangements with environmental groups and Congress. Certainly, cap-and-trade rules will create valuable property rights and reward companies that reduce CO2 emissions, often by replacing old, inefficient, high-polluting plants that they want to retire anyway. DuPont and BP will get money for biofuels, GE for its portfolio of climate protection equipment, ADM for ethanol, Lehman Brothers for emission trading and other deals. Environmental activists will be able to influence corporate, state and federal policy, and rake in still more cash. Insurance companies can blame global warming for rate increases and coverage denials. Lobbying and deal-brokering will enter a new era. As Thenardier the innkeeper observed in Les Miserables, "When it comes to fixing prices, there are lots of tricks he knows. Jees, it's just amazing how it grows." Indeed, the opportunities to "game the system" will be limited only by one's "eco-magination." To determine the losers, look in the mirror. Activists and politicians are creating a Frankenstein climate monster on steroids. Were it real, we'd need to dismantle our economy and living standards to slay the beast. How else could we eliminate 80-90% of US and EU fossil fuel emissions by 2050, to stabilize carbon dioxide emissions and (theoretically) a climate that has always been anything but stable? Think lifestyles circa 1900, or earlier. Ponder the British environment minister's latest prescription: World War II rationing, no meat or cheese, restrictions on air travel, no veggies that aren't grown locally. France wants a new government agency that would single out, police and penalize countries that "abuse the Earth." Others want to put little solar panels on African huts, while kleptocratic dictators get millions of dollars for trading away their people's right to generate electricity and emit CO2. We should improve energy efficiency, reduce pollution, and develop new energy technologies. But when we demand immediate action to prevent exaggerated or imaginary crises, we stifle debate, railroad through programs that don't work, create enough pork to fill 50 Chicago stockyards, and impose horrendous unintended consequences on countless families. That is shortsighted and immoral. http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/Sho...np&date=070206 "Our understanding of the climate is very primitive, simply because the climate is so complex. Climate is an immense, multi-stable, driven, chaotic, optimally turbulent, constructally organized tera-watt scale heat engine, with dozens of forcings and feedbacks, both internal and external, and both known and unknown. It is composed of five major subsystems (ocean, atmosphere, lithosphere, cryosphere, and biosphere), none of which are well understood. Each of these subsystems has its own forcings and feedbacks, again both known and unknown, which affect both itself and the system as a whole. "In addition, because of the sheer size of the system, our measurements of the various phenomena have large error margins. Even with satellites, we don 't have good figures for such basic things as total upwelling radiation at different frequencies, the albedo, or the temperature of the upper atmosphere. Our scientific knowledge of the whole is so poor, and our measurements are so uncertain, that we can not predict the next month's weather or the next decade's climate in anything more than the most general terms. "Despite (or perhaps because of) this lack of knowledge, the rude truth is that many climate scientists seem extremely reluctant to say "we don't know". As a result, people like yourself and others expect or request that we explain extremely short-term (25 year) fluctuations in the climate. Unfortunately, given our current state of knowledge, this is not necessarily possible. "Take for example the effects of the solar magnetic field on climate. This effect is known, but is very poorly understood. Is it responsible for the recent warming? We don't know. "And this is separate from the effect of coronal mass ejections and the solar wind on climate, which is even less understood. "Or how about the effect of land use changes? NOAA has said publicly that they may have a greater effect than CO2 changes. Are they responsible for the recent warming? We don't know. "It is well known that there are a variety of short-term (multi-decadal) oscillations or shifts in the climate system, such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Arctic Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and others. These have significant effects on the global temperature. Could one of these, or a combination of these, or other unknown oscillations have caused the recent warming? We don't know. "Methane is not a well-mixed gas. Levels vary all over the world. It has recently been discovered that plants emit methane, perhaps a quarter of the global totals. This methane is concentrated in the lowest levels of the atmosphere. Worldwide, the planet is greening. What effect has this had on the registered temperatures, which are measured in the lowest layers of the atmosphere? We don't know. "It has recently been discovered that plankton emit gases that cause the formation of clouds above them. What effect does this have on the climate? We don't know. "How much has the sun's irradiance changed since 1975? There is much scientific dispute about that question as well, because of the lack of overlap between satellites that have given different answers. "Finally, how do these (and a host of other forcings and feedbacks) affect each other? What happens if a swing in the PDO occurs at the same time as a swing in the cosmic ray intensity, or any of hundreds of other possible interactions? This we really, really don't know. "In fact, of the 12 forcings listed by the IPCC in the Third Annual Report, the "Level of Scientific Understanding" (LOSU) of nine of them is rated as "Low", or "Very Low" . that's the majority of the forcings (and doesn't even include some known forcings), yet despite that, people like yourself say "explain the historical record". Sorry, but . we don't know. "Now, faced with this lack of knowledge, the standard response from the AGW crowd is "it must be CO2? . but why must it be CO2? Not knowing is certainly not proof of anything. In addition, the change doesn't fit the theoretical model of CO2 effects. Why would CO2 cause very little effect until 1975 (as evidenced by the close correlation between solar and temperature up to that point) and then suddenly cause a large effect? Why would the sun's suddenly stop affecting the temperature in 1975? Saying "we can't explain it, so it must be CO2? is nonsense. "So, despite the existence of a wide variety of possible explanations, I regret that I cannot offer you anything that is "resistant to criticism" about what caused the divergence. We don't even have any evidence "resistant to criticism" regarding whether the divergence is of the claimed size. It is one of the many, many unsolved mysteries of the climate. All it proves is one thing . "WE DON'T KNOW" |
|
#5
April 24th 07, 03:25 AM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lies and Distortion in Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth
In article .com,
Cato wrote: http://newyork.craigslist.org/wch/pol/314920789.html http://www.cei.org/pdf/ait/app.pdf Al Gore...... quite an interesting guy! Made an interesting little socialist propoganda film called "An Inconvenient Truth" as most of us know. He's been up here in Toronto, Canada a few times giving talks to the "True Believers" of this new Global Warming, Climate Change, "It's All Our Fault" religion. Signed a lot of autographs for left wing Canadians that admire him. I guess he is one of the High Priests, just like that Dr. David Suzuki guy. He is a real Prophet of Doom in this new faith too. The web site URL's above show Lies & Distortions in his film. Quite interesting. Yeah, the biggest energy consumer and polluter in the northern hemisphere telling the masses that they have to cut back. What a hoot. Be sure to buy those carbon credits from his sham company when you drive your car to work or the grocery store. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
|
#6
April 24th 07, 08:17 PM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lies and Distortion in Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth
On Apr 23, 6:09 am, David wrote:
On 22 Apr 2007 19:41:47 -0700, Cato wrote: http://newyork.craigslist.org/wch/pol/314920789.html http://www.cei.org/pdf/ait/app.pdf Al Gore...... quite an interesting guy! Made an interesting little socialist propoganda film called "An Inconvenient Truth" as most of us know. He's been up here in Toronto, Canada a few times giving talks to the "True Believers" of this new Global Warming, Climate Change, "It's All Our Fault" religion. Signed a lot of autographs for left wing Canadians that admire him. I guess he is one of the High Priests, just like that Dr. David Suzuki guy. He is a real Prophet of Doom in this new faith too. The web site URL's above show Lies & Distortions in his film. Quite interesting. Cato http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Iain_Murray- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - DaviD - So your 'authoritative source is the Source Watch = http://www.sourcewatch.org/ A Front for the Center for Media and Democracy Orgs Supported by the Tides Foundation; a Front for the Heinz Endowments, headed by Teresa Heinz Kerry http://www.activistcash.com/organiza...ew.cfm/oid/225 Tides Foundation and the Tides Center, creating a new model for Liberal {Left Wing} Grant-Making - one that Strains the Legal Boundaries of U.S. Tax Law {Tax Evasion ?} in the pursuit of Liberal {Leftist} Socialist Activist Goals. keep pushing the liberal 'bs' up the hill ~ RHF |
|
#7
April 24th 07, 08:54 PM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lies and Distortion in Dr.David's Decoder Ring
"David" wrote in message ... On 23 Apr 2007 10:53:35 -0700, Cato wrote: SOURCEWATCH -- a Left - Socialist Organization that attacks Conservatism and Libertarianism. They tend to strongly support Left- Liberal-Socialist values. So, sure, Ya, like I'm going to listen to them. Right. Why not? I listen to your CEI and AEI people. You must listen to all sides of an argument then use your truth decoder ring. Your decoder ring is Made in China! |
|
#8
April 24th 07, 09:28 PM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lies and Distortion in Dr.David's Decoder Ring
The cia,the Narco republicans,and 5.5 Tons of Cocaine.
www.madcowprod.com/index.html Remember that photo of g.w.Cocaine bush and his brother,jeb Cocaine bush at Tamiami Airport,standing by that Airplane with that big haul of Cocaine they stold from somebody? I saw it on the internet five or six years ago.U.S.fed govt are the Biggest drug dealers in the World.Those Poppys in Afghanistan are still growing too.bush once said he would have all of those Poppy (Opium) fields in Afghanistan shut down.Go LQQK it up. cuhulin |
|
#9
April 24th 07, 11:01 PM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lies and Distortion in Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth
On Apr 23, 6:09 am, David wrote:
On 22 Apr 2007 19:41:47 -0700, Cato wrote: http://newyork.craigslist.org/wch/pol/314920789.html http://www.cei.org/pdf/ait/app.pdf Al Gore...... quite an interesting guy! Made an interesting little socialist propoganda film called "An Inconvenient Truth" as most of us know. He's been up here in Toronto, Canada a few times giving talks to the "True Believers" of this new Global Warming, Climate Change, "It's All Our Fault" religion. Signed a lot of autographs for left wing Canadians that admire him. I guess he is one of the High Priests, just like that Dr. David Suzuki guy. He is a real Prophet of Doom in this new faith too. The web site URL's above show Lies & Distortions in his film. Quite interesting. Cato http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Iain_Murray- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - DaviD - So your 'authoritative source is the Source Watch = http://www.sourcewatch.org/ A Front for the Center for Media and Democracy Orgs Supported by the Tides Foundation; a Front for the Heinz Endowments, headed by Teresa Heinz Kerry http://www.activistcash.com/organiza...ew.cfm/oid/225 Tides Foundation and the Tides Center, creating a new model for Liberal {Left Wing} Grant-Making - one that Strains the Legal Boundaries of U.S. Tax Law {Tax Evasion ?} in the pursuit of Liberal {Leftist} Socialist Activist Goals. keep pushing the liberal 'bs' up the hill ~ RHF |
|
#10
April 24th 07, 11:12 PM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lies and Distortion in Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth
On Apr 24, 6:05 am, David wrote:
On 23 Apr 2007 10:53:35 -0700, Cato wrote: SOURCEWATCH -- a Left - Socialist Organization that attacks Conservatism and Libertarianism. They tend to strongly support Left- Liberal-Socialist values. So, sure, Ya, like I'm going to listen to them. Right. Why not? I listen to your CEI and AEI people. You must listen to all sides of an argument then use your truth decoder ring. David - Good here is the 'other' side of the Facts {No Al Gore Hype Exaggeration of the Facts to Create Fear and Hysteria Required} - Just a realistic 'alternative view' of the known Scientific Evidence to Consider by Those would Think-for-Themselves. ~ RHF |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Maj Robeson lies and libels wether He knows the truth or not | Policy | |||
| Maj Robeson lies and libels wether He knows the truth or not | General | |||
| Read and Weep, The Truth Lies Here | Shortwave | |||
Linear Mode
